| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Walter Avery | Analyst |
| Ms. Joann H. Langston | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Melinda M. Darby | Member | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his discharge under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) be upgraded to general and his reentry (RE) code to RE-2.
APPLICANT STATES: That he served in the military for several years. One incident should not prohibit him from serving again.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He served in the Army National Guard (ARNG) from 4 August 1992 through 22 May 2000. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 May 2000 at the rank of specialist four for a period of 4 years and was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas.
The applicant completed a US Army Recruiting Command Form 1104 (Enlistment Eligibility Questionnaire), as part of a Regular Army enlistment packet. He indicated that while a member of the ARNG he received punishment for an absent without leave (AWOL) incident.
Charges were preferred against the applicant on 27 June 2001 charging him with AWOL from 6 June through 19 June 2001 and AWOL from 12 February through 20 February 2001, and for disobeying a lawful command from a superior commissioned officer.
On 30 April 2001, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for absenting himself from his place of duty without authority. His punishment was reduction to grade E-3; forfeiture of $284.00 per month for one month, suspension to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 29 November 2001, and extra duty and restriction of 14 days. He did not appeal the punishment.
A Checklist for Pretrail Confinement reflects that while the applicant was AWOL on 6 June 2001, he attempted to (fraudulently) enlist in the ARNG of Kansas.
On 22 June 2001, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant voluntarily requested a discharge under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel), chapter 10 for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The applicant was advised of the effects of a discharge UOTHC and that he might be deprived of many or all Army and Veterans Administration benefits. He did not submit a statement in his own.
The appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request and directed the applicant be discharged with the issuance of an UOTHC certificate.
On 27 July 2001, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-1 with a RE-4 code. He had completed 1 year, 1 month, and 14 days of creditable active service and had 21 days of lost time.
On 14 June 2002, the Army Discharge Review Board notified the applicant his request for an upgrade of his discharge had been denied.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. The request may be submitted at any time after charges have been preferred and must include the individual’s admission of guilt. A discharge UOTHC is normally considered appropriate.
Army Regulation 635-5-1, Separation Program Designator Codes, (SPD) provides, in pertinent part, that soldiers separated in accordance with Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 will be assigned the SPD code of KFS. The cross-reference table provides, in pertinent part, that soldiers separated with SPD code KFS will be assigned RE-4.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The applicant provided no information concerning the circumstances that led to his discharge or information concerning post service achievements that would help in justifying a discharge upgrade.
2. The applicant’s voluntary request for separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10, for the good of the service to avoid trial by court-martial, was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations. The evidence of record shows that he was counseled prior to making this voluntary request. There is no indication that the request was made under coercion or duress. There is no evidence to show that the charges were dropped for any reason other than to allow him to administratively separate in lieu of trial by court-martial. The evidence of record shows he had a prior record of misconduct and the chapter 10 was based on more than one incident of misconduct. The type of discharge and the related RE code given was and still is appropriate.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
__mmd__ ____jhl__ ___reb___ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR200275397 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | UOTHC |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200, ch 10 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | A70.00 |
| BOARD DECISION | |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013354
The applicant requests his discharge characterization and the reason for his discharge be changed to an uncharacterized discharge. As evidence to support his application, the applicant provided his ARNG discharge orders and NGB Form 22 showing he was discharged on 21 June 2001 with an uncharacterized discharge. c. Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 3-9a(1), states that a separation will be described as entry level with service uncharacterized if processing is initiated while a Soldier is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024089
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The SPD code of "KFS" is the correct code for Soldiers separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 10 by reason of in lieu of trial by court-martial. His request for a chapter 10 discharge, even after appropriate and proper consultation with a military lawyer, tends to show he wished to avoid the court-martial conviction and the punitive discharge that he might have received.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061830C070421
EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may submit a request for discharge for the good of the service, in lieu of trial by court-martial. In view of the circumstances in this case, Board concludes the UOTHC characterization of service and RE-4 code assigned the applicant upon his discharge...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088726C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged with a separation code of “KFS” (For the Good of the Service – In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial) and issued a RE code of RE-4.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130014670
Discharge Received: Under Other Than Honorable Conditions c. Date of Discharge: 27 July 2009 d. Reason/Authority/SPD/RE Code: In Lieu of Trial by Court-Martial, Chapter 10, KFS RE-4 e. Unit of assignment: D Co, 232d Med Bn, Fort Sam Houston, TX f. Current Enlistment Date/Term: 25 September 2008, 4 years g. Current Enlistment Service: 7 months, 22 days h. Total Service: 1 year, 1 month, 19 days i. On 9 July 2009, the separation authority approved the Chapter 10 request and directed the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005482
He states that he will do anything necessary to have his RE code changed from an RE-4 to an RE-3 so that he can reenlist in the Army. On 26 June 2008, the separation authority approved the applicant's request for discharge in lieu of trial by court-martial and directed the applicant be furnished an UOTHC discharge, and on 18 July 2008, the applicant was discharged accordingly. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040003037C070208
Jonathon K. Rost | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities (regulatory or directive), reasons for separating soldiers from active duty, and the SPD codes to be...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090009805
On 24 January 2008, the separation authority approved the applicants request for discharge and directed that he receive a UOTHC discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge. By regulation, the SPD code of KFS and the RE code of RE-4 are the proper codes to assign members...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012025
In his discharge request, the applicant acknowledged his understanding that by submitting a request for discharge, he was admitting guilt to the charge against him, or of a lesser included offense therein contained which also authorized the imposition of a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge. An UOTHC discharge normally is appropriate for a Soldier who is discharged in lieu of trial by court-martial. It states, in pertinent part, that the SPD code KFS is the appropriate code to assign to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000233C070206
LaVerne M. Douglas | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 5 December 2001 the separation authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed that he receive an under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge under the provisions of chapter 10, Army Regulation 635-200. Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned...